Well Played, Sirs And Ma'ams

[ink the world]

Something tells me Parker got stuffed in a lot of lockers when he was in high school.

 

[UncleBuck]

or may still be in high school.

 

[doc111]

Something tells me Parker got stuffed in a lot of lockers when he was in high school.

That reminds me, where has Rick White been of late?

 

[ink the world]

Just spit water all over my monitor, thanks for another laugh Doc....I was just thinking "i wonder if he's actually Rick White"
No shit

 

[Parker]

Just spit water all over my monitor, thanks for another laugh Doc....I was just thinking "i wonder if he's actually Rick White"
No shit

lol just spit water all over my monitor lmao riiiight you are believeable
the little man is easily amused. If you can't refute the issues make it about the poster. Then try to make the poster BE someone they are not. The best part is the ones who cry about the insults but it's okay if they do it. hypocrite, how can anyone take you seriously?

 

[Parker]

parker, i must tell you....you really like to tell people how "they don't understand" or "don't get it"....you do it so often. it gets really annoying.

what is more annoying is people like you who misrepresent others reasons. Disagree with me, fine that can be respected. But lying about where someone stands on the issues? That's why you don't get respect.
Another reason to hate Unclebuck bbbbbut I like unclebuck lmao keep trying

 

[Parker]

what a great solution
give the children shittier education because the local officials are regressive bigots.
pure. fucking. genius. all thanks to the gospel of parker.

Like I said you don't get it. Because of your inability to understand a point that is not my failure it is your. I keep repeating myself but ignore and deny are the handy work of cowards. I've already said how I would vote and you ignore that. I've already stated where I stand on abortion and you ignore that. You are consistent if anything. Keep making things up about others if you feel you have to live lies in order to feel better. Like I keep saying that is your failure not mine.

i'm sorry, we weren't talking aout prohibition. we were talking about demint's position on letting local jurisdictions deny equal protection under the law to certain groups of people. ensuring equal protection under the law IS a function of the federal government. your attempt to extrapolate to other cases to make me look like a nanny stater was pathetic at best, just like the rest of your debating skills, the most popular of which would be telling people that "they don't undertsand" and throwing insults.

like I said you don't get it. You want it to be about what YOU want instead of the Constitution, how we were founded, and what IS right.

 

[Parker]

Hey Parker, keep the fucking insults to yourself....

Enough of the internet tough guy act trying to belittle me and shit....Ive served this country for the rights YOU enjoy, I hardly need a lecture on freedom or its price, I know all too well personally...you can disagree w/ me but there isnt a need for insults....

Thank you for serving your country. It is a very noble act.

"Something tells me Parker got stuffed in a lot of lockers when he was in high school."

Practice what you preach, boy. People don't take hypocrites seriously.

 

[Parker]

no birth control besides abstinence is 100% effective, and calling something that is more or less a parasite and unable to live outside its mother's womb 'life' is debatable.

but THANK YOU!!!! for being clear.

that is something parker is unable to do without 100% contradicting himself.
i should point out to parker that his statement 'if it threatens the life of the mother' is still 100% ambiguous and unclear.

like I said you're inability to understand is your failing. This isn't about me. You should quit lying about what I say in order to make your point. You loose respect when you do that.

suppose a doctor spotted complications with the pregnancy and diagnosed that giving birth would result in the death of the mother about 9 times out of 10. is it acceptable to abort to protect the life of the mother at that point?

now suppose the same scenario, but it would only result in the death of the mother 5 times out of 10. now is it acceptable to abort to protect the life of the mother?

now suppose the same scenario, but it would only result in the death of the mother 1 times out of 10, or even as little as 1 in 100, or even 1 in 1000. at what point is it not acceptable to abort to protect the life of the mother?

any pregnancy can result in death to the mother, sometimes with no forewarning.

agreed and there's the rub. A doctor and patient can gather the info and interpret it themselves. They can do it in a way to strengthen their position.

 

[UncleBuck]

agreed

aha! so since we agree that any pregnancy whatsoever may endanger the life of the mother, and your position is abortion only if the life of the mother is endangered, you are for abortion in any pregnancy whatsoever by transitivity.

i never realized we had so much in common politically!

 

[Johnnyorganic]

aha! so since we agree that any pregnancy whatsoever may endanger the life of the mother, and your position is abortion only if the life of the mother is endangered, you are for abortion in any pregnancy whatsoever by transitivity.

i never realized we had so much in common politically!

Why do abortion proponents insist on dragging out that rape/incest/life of the mother red herring when those procedures represent such a tiny percentage of abortions performed?

I have a question for abortion proponents who rely in the rape/incest/life of the mother argument; and this is coming from someone who is abortion-tolerant, meaning I am against it personally, but accept it as public policy. To me, the reason for seeking an abortion is irrelevant as it is a privacy issue.

If abortion were legal only for those cases involving rape, incest, or the life of the mother was at stake; would you be satisfied?

Fuck it! I'll answer it for you.

You would not be happy because that's the way it was before Roe v. Wade.

The sad reality is that most abortions are performed as birth control. A convenience.

I can accept that, but let's be honest and not resort to cheap and largely baseless emotional appeals.

 

[KlosetKing]

i find it funny that there are so many reasons to not really like that chick (odonnell), yet the mainstream media cant get over something she said on PI a decade ago lol shows how faux news (and others) are more about the hype than they are about the issues.

 

[londonfog]

I have a buddy of mine who is a good old red neck from the Lone Star State of Texas who was so against Obama and his health care it ain't funny..always bad mouthing Obama no matter what the POTUS did. I always corrected him on the misinformation that his mouth sprewed out. Now part of me realized that most of his fears are from the way he was raised, but I'm a firm believer that any one can change once they see the truth. Recently he went to the doctor due to the fact that he thought he had kidney stones, come to find out its a tumor. Now he is stressing out over his medical coverage and how he is to pay for it ( let alone the fact that he has a tumor). When I went to go see him in the hospital with tubes and such coming all out of him I was sadden how quickly you can be up jumping around one minute then boom you lying on your back worrying about the outcome of your medical condition and the means to pay for it. As we talked about BS to get our minds away from the reason he is in hospital he makes a statement that truly confirms my believe..he tells me now he sees that health care for all is not such a bad idea. I know it hurt for him to have to say that being that he is a good old red neck from the Lone Star State of Texas, but like they say the truth hurts. Most of these tea party members are fighting against things that would actually benefits them.

 

[ink the world]

I have a question for abortion proponents who rely in the rape/incest/life of the mother argument; and this is coming from someone who is abortion-tolerant, meaning I am against it personally, but accept it as public policy. To me, the reason for seeking an abortion is irrelevant as it is a privacy issue.

If abortion were legal only for those cases involving rape, incest, or the life of the mother was at stake; would you be satisfied?

I'll answer for ya Johnny....I would be satisfied.
While I support a womans rights, I also dont support abortion as birth control. Some might call that "sitting on the fence," I look at it as moderation.

I have a buddy of mine who is a good old red neck from the Lone Star State of Texas who was so against Obama and his health care it ain't funny..always bad mouthing Obama no matter what the POTUS did. I always corrected him on the misinformation that his mouth sprewed out. Now part of me realized that most of his fears are from the way he was raised, but I'm a firm believer that any one can change once they see the truth. Recently he went to the doctor due to the fact that he thought he had kidney stones, come to find out its a tumor. Now he is stressing out over his medical coverage and how he is to pay for it ( let alone the fact that he has a tumor). When I went to go see him in the hospital with tubes and such coming all out of him I was sadden how quickly you can be up jumping around one minute then boom you lying on your back worrying about the outcome of your medical condition and the means to pay for it. As we talked about BS to get our minds away from the reason he is in hospital he makes a statement that truly confirms my believe..he tells me now he sees that health care for all is not such a bad idea. I know it hurt for him to have to say that being that he is a good old red neck from the Lone Star State of Texas, but like they say the truth hurts. Most of these tea party members are fighting against things that would actually benefits them.

London, i hope your friend is OK...

 

[Parker]

aha! so since we agree that any pregnancy whatsoever may endanger the life of the mother, and your position is abortion only if the life of the mother is endangered, you are for abortion in any pregnancy whatsoever by transitivity.

sigh no we do not agree on "any pregnancy whatsoever may endanger the life of the mother". Some can, depends on the variables.

i never realized we had so much in common politically!

lol not really. Your reasons CAN put you on the same side of the fence as me but we got there differently.

 

[Parker]

I have a buddy of mine who is a good old red neck from the Lone Star State of Texas who was so against Obama and his health care it ain't funny..always bad mouthing Obama no matter what the POTUS did. I always corrected him on the misinformation that his mouth sprewed out. Now part of me realized that most of his fears are from the way he was raised, but I'm a firm believer that any one can change once they see the truth. Recently he went to the doctor due to the fact that he thought he had kidney stones, come to find out its a tumor. Now he is stressing out over his medical coverage and how he is to pay for it ( let alone the fact that he has a tumor). When I went to go see him in the hospital with tubes and such coming all out of him I was sadden how quickly you can be up jumping around one minute then boom you lying on your back worrying about the outcome of your medical condition and the means to pay for it. As we talked about BS to get our minds away from the reason he is in hospital he makes a statement that truly confirms my believe..he tells me now he sees that health care for all is not such a bad idea. I know it hurt for him to have to say that being that he is a good old red neck from the Lone Star State of Texas, but like they say the truth hurts. Most of these tea party members are fighting against things that would actually benefits them.

hmmmmm No doubt stories like this do exist. But it's just another example of people and their desperation when their backs are too the wall. We saw this during FDRs depression. People were desperate for help and the unconstitutional theft programs like SS were born. More recently we saw this in the flu scare that went around. Everybody get your flu shots or really really bad things will happen.

The problem with this thought process is you don't go far enough. Just like my little lost puppys on here. Always wanting to treat the symptom instead of the cause.
You see the answer as government intervention because you yourself are unable to decide what is best for you. Which is ironic because YOU now get to decide for others by forcing health care on them.

We speak of personal responsibility yet over 30 percent of our population is obese. Do you think that fact hurts people in their ability to remain healthy? ahh no biggie the government will save them (with MY money)

Do you ever ask why technology has driven the price down in other fields except medicine? Why are the prices of pharmaceuticals so high compared to other places? Couldn't be government intervention in the free market could it?
If anyone wants to call the insurance companies a bad name, great, go for it. But don't dare blame that on capitalism. It is in no way a free market ideal. Government laid the foundation down.

Do you ask why there is lack of competition in the health insurance industry? One cannot sell out of state which keeps prices higher and service worse than a free market would. It is the same answer as why states rights were trumped and you cannot sue for more than the amount of the claim. (ERISA) answer - government intervention

"The judge ruled that this came under the ERISA guidelines because the corporation paid a premium even though premiums were paid on a personal basis for almost 17 years. How was this bad for the claimant? Under ERISA guidelines you cannot sue an insurance company for bad faith (punitive damages) so the judge threw out the bad faith aspects of the claim, which meant that the attorney could only talk about the contractual language and not the bad prior deeds of the insurance company. In addition, ERISA guidelines say that the claimant cannot have a jury and cannot sue for the future potential value of the contract. The claimant can only sue to get the monthly benefit plus attorney expenses and fees. In essence, it gives the insurance company a legal edge. Many of the heavy hitter disability attorneys do not want to be involved in ERISA claims because they can’t sue for bad faith. They cannot secure “future benefits” or a percentage of same in the form of a settlement as it relates to ERISA claims. They usually cannot charge a 30% to 40% contingency fee on the contractual benefits (future value) and that does not make for a happy attorney!"

Why should insurance companies pay the claim when IF the patient is still alive when it comes to court all they loose is the original claim anyway. (plus attorney costs and fees) It is BECAUSE of government intervention we are at this horrible juncture. And YOU want those very same people to run things??

You look to the government to raise you from cradle to grave,.never noticing that government has sold you down the river in a leaky boat.

I am a Tea Party member. Explain to me how these things that are very costly and inefficient would help me? Would healthcare insurance help me? Sure but not the overpriced inefficient one being forced down my throat. Would SS help me in my retirement years? Sure but I would have used that money better myself than the government. I would have loved to have the option to opt out of SS instead of forcefully having the money stolen from me.

How long is it going to take for people to wake up?

 

[londonfog]

hmmmmm seems strange. I don't know of too many compassionate people who have friends in the hospital and then refer to that person in a degrading manner as you did in your post.

No doubt stories like this do exist. But it's just another example of people and their desperation when their backs are too the wall. We saw this during FDRs depression. People were desperate for help and the unconstitutional theft programs like SS were born. More recently we saw this in the flu scare that went around. Everybody get your flu shots or really really bad things will happen.

The problem with this thought process is you don't go far enough. Just like my little lost puppys on here. Always wanting to treat the symptom instead of the cause.
You see the answer as government intervention because you yourself are unable to decide what is best for you. Which is ironic because YOU now get to decide for others by forcing health care on them.

We speak of personal responsibility yet over 30 percent of our population is obese. Do you think that fact hurts people in their ability to remain healthy? ahh no biggie the government will save them (with MY money)

Do you ever ask why technology has driven the price down in other fields except medicine? Why are the prices of pharmaceuticals so high compared to other places? Couldn't be government intervention in the free market could it?
If anyone wants to call the insurance companies a bad name, great, go for it. But don't dare blame that on capitalism. It is in no way a free market ideal. Government laid the foundation down.

Do you ask why there is lack of competition in the health insurance industry? One cannot sell out of state which keeps prices higher and service worse than a free market would. It is the same answer as why states rights were trumped and you cannot sue for more than the amount of the claim. (ERISA) answer - government intervention

"The judge ruled that this came under the ERISA guidelines because the corporation paid a premium even though premiums were paid on a personal basis for almost 17 years. How was this bad for the claimant? Under ERISA guidelines you cannot sue an insurance company for bad faith (punitive damages) so the judge threw out the bad faith aspects of the claim, which meant that the attorney could only talk about the contractual language and not the bad prior deeds of the insurance company. In addition, ERISA guidelines say that the claimant cannot have a jury and cannot sue for the future potential value of the contract. The claimant can only sue to get the monthly benefit plus attorney expenses and fees. In essence, it gives the insurance company a legal edge. Many of the heavy hitter disability attorneys do not want to be involved in ERISA claims because they can’t sue for bad faith. They cannot secure “future benefits” or a percentage of same in the form of a settlement as it relates to ERISA claims. They usually cannot charge a 30% to 40% contingency fee on the contractual benefits (future value) and that does not make for a happy attorney!"

Why should insurance companies pay the claim when IF the patient is still alive when it comes to court all they loose is the original claim anyway. (plus attorney costs and fees) It is BECAUSE of government intervention we are at this horrible juncture. And YOU want those very same people to run things??

You look to the government to raise you from cradle to grave,.never noticing that government has sold you down the river in a leaky boat.

I am a Tea Party member. Explain to me how these things that are very costly and inefficient would help me? Would healthcare insurance help me? Sure but not the overpriced inefficient one being forced down my throat. Would SS help me in my retirement years? Sure but I would have used that money better myself than the government. I would have loved to have the option to opt out of SS instead of forcefully having the money stolen from me.

How long is it going to take for people to wake up?

First off show me where I was demeaning...I stated facts about a friend and if you knew him you would say the same...He himself would describe himself as such ( where you think I got it from )..as far as you being forced to pay for someone else health care ...geez do you realize you do now when ever someone goes to the emergency room..and by the way how much are you paying for the health care being force down your throat ????? I'm sure you have an answer seeing how you are saying its over priced.......any hoot I will give you some ways as to not paying into SS. Become a teacher instead of paying 6.2% of your salary for FICA, you can pay 11.5% into a public school retirement system trust.... you can also give up your U.S. citizenship (expatriate) and move to a tax haven.... or just stop working or work strictly under the table..

 

[Parker]

First off show me where I was demeaning...I stated facts about a friend and if you knew him you would say the same...He himself would describe himself as such ( where you think I got it from )..as far as you being forced to pay for someone else health care ...geez do you realize you do now when ever someone goes to the emergency room..and by the way how much are you paying for the health care being force down your throat ????? I'm sure you have an answer seeing how you are saying its over priced.......any hoot I will give you some ways as to not paying into SS. Become a teacher instead of paying 6.2% of your salary for FICA, you can pay 11.5% into a public school retirement system trust.... you can also give up your U.S. citizenship (expatriate) and move to a tax haven.... or just stop working or work strictly under the table..

I changed my post to delete that but since you brought it up. I don't have any friends who portray someone negatively by calling them red neck or negatively paint the state they reside in or use words like spew. Sure we'll make jokes about it but we tend to back off when it comes to tumors and serious stuff. Maybe my term as friend is different than yours but you do say you visited them in the hospital so maybe not.
You hit the nail on the head in a way. Why do we HAVE to do those things to avoid paying those types of taxes in the first place? We do we have to give things up because others think it's okay to pass laws allowing stealing?

You didn't address much in my previous post? Is it because you have submitted to government force?

 

[Johnnyorganic]

I'll answer for ya Johnny....I would be satisfied.
While I support a womans rights, I also dont support abortion as birth control. Some might call that "sitting on the fence," I look at it as moderation.

Thank you for answering.

I appreciate your candor.

I take considerable heat from Republicans for being abortion-tolerant and calling myself Conservative; but as I stated previously, it's a privacy issue.

That inalienable right applies to everyone regardless of genitalia.

 

[Rob Roy]

Why do abortion proponents insist on dragging out that rape/incest/life of the mother red herring when those procedures represent such a tiny percentage of abortions performed?

I have a question for abortion proponents who rely in the rape/incest/life of the mother argument; and this is coming from someone who is abortion-tolerant, meaning I am against it personally, but accept it as public policy. To me, the reason for seeking an abortion is irrelevant as it is a privacy issue.

If abortion were legal only for those cases involving rape, incest, or the life of the mother was at stake; would you be satisfied?

Fuck it! I'll answer it for you.

You would not be happy because that's the way it was before Roe v. Wade.

The sad reality is that most abortions are performed as birth control. A convenience.

I can accept that, but let's be honest and not resort to cheap and largely baseless emotional appeals.

Absolutely.